Alexander Nachkebiya v. Exhibition Hub, SRL et al
| Alexander Nachkebiya |
| Exhibition Hub, SRL and Does 1 through 20, inclusive |
| Exhibition Hub SRL |
| 2:2021cv09148 |
| November 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Gail J Standish |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 8, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya. Dismissal is with prejudice. (Prout, Andrew) |
Filing 14
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Alexander H. Shapiro to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya and designating Andrew G. Prout as local counsel #11 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi (lc)
|
| Filing 13 Notice of Withdrawal of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, #9 filed by Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya. (Choi, Traci) |
| Filing 12 OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER in opposition to re: First EX PARTE APPLICATION for Temporary Restraining Order as to Artwork #9 filed by Defendant Exhibition Hub, SRL. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Mario Iacampo, #2 Declaration of Brian J. Headman, #3 Exhibit A to Brian J. Headman Declaration)(Schare, Allan) |
| Filing 11 First APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Alexander H. Shapiro to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-32380844) filed by Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Pro Hac Vice Order) (Prout, Andrew) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE Notice of Ex Parte Application filed by Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya. (Prout, Andrew) |
| Filing 9 First EX PARTE APPLICATION for Temporary Restraining Order as to Artwork filed by Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Attorney Declaration, #2 Declaration Plaintiff Declaration, #3 Proposed Order Proposed Order on TRO) (Prout, Andrew) |
|
Filing 8
INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
|
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (et) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Mark C. Scarsi and Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. (et) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE TO ADVERSE PARTY OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT filed by Movant Exhibition Hub SRL (Attachments: #1 Exhibit AA)(Schare, Allan) |
| CONFORMED E-FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Exhibition Hub, SRL, Does 1 through 20, inclusive, filed by Plaintiff Alexander Nachkebiya. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 11/19/2021 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 . (et) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Exhibition Hub SRL, identifying Exhibition Hub SRL; Alexander Nachkebiya; Mario Iacampo; Hamza El Azhar. (Schare, Allan) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Movant Exhibition Hub SRL. (Schare, Allan) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from LASC - West District (Santa Monica), case number 21SMCV01844 Receipt No: ACACDC-32369564 - Fee: $402, filed by Defendant Exhibition Hub SRL. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit, #3 Declaration of Mario Iacampo, #4 Declaration of Hamza El Azhar) (Attorney Allan L Schare added to party Exhibition Hub SRL(pty:mov))(Schare, Allan) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
